Python vs. Lisp -- please explain
Paul Boddie
paul at boddie.org.uk
Wed Feb 22 09:05:20 EST 2006
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Wed Feb 22 09:05:20 EST 2006
- Previous message (by thread): Python vs. Lisp -- please explain
- Next message (by thread): Python vs. Lisp -- please explain
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Kay Schluehr wrote: > Paul Rubin wrote: > > "Kay Schluehr" <kay.schluehr at gmx.net> writes: > > > I talked to Richard Emslie recently and he told me that the PyPy team > > > works on a mechanism to create CPython-extension modules written in > > > RPython i.e. a statically translateable subset of Python. > > > > Sounds great but is that a whole lot different from pyrex? I've wondered that as well. > RPython is Python code not a different language. In a sense RPython > consists of a set of rules usual Python has to conform to make complete > type-inference feasible. Here is an overview of those rules. > > http://codespeak.net/pypy/dist/pypy/doc/coding-guide.html#restricted-python But does that make it "proper Python"? Having, for example, only one type associated with a name (they use the term "variable", though) at any given time makes it more like various statically typed or functional languages, although I can fully understand why you'd want this restriction. Paul
- Previous message (by thread): Python vs. Lisp -- please explain
- Next message (by thread): Python vs. Lisp -- please explain
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list